Trying to be a semi-pro amateur physicist (yes I accept special relativity is right!). I _had_ my own effort to unify gravity with other forces in Nature. It ran into quite a number of technically... Read More »
I think of myself as non-violent, a purple guy in the blue state of Massachusetts. When it comes to proposals in science though, I go for head shots. Nature doesn’t care if we keep repackaging bullshit. A well-fed bull does not run out of bullshit.
To stop a science zombie, a bullet to the brain is all that might stop it. I know from experience that the easiest person to fool is myself. I am on the lookout for bullets for subjects I speculate on.
A great title is key to getting lots of views. For my blogs, ones with the fewest views include “Snarky Puzzle Answers”, and “Snarky Puzzle Answers 2”. Do I have high expectations for SPA 3, Revenge of the Nerds? Nope, I expect the community to be consistent. This is an observation, not a complaint, honest.
What is exciting to me is that I am asking questions and developing answers. I want to emphasize the plural. This is not a one trick pony (quaternions can do 3D rotations and nothing else of interest). Many different topics are being raised and looked at from odd angles. I didn’t have a plan to write these puzzles, but am glad they emerged from the blog writing process. Now back to the questions and their answers.
I got counter snarked. At the end of my blogs, I include what I call a snarky puzzle. If you can follow along with the technical parts of my blogs, a snarky puzzle is suppose to be a playful but snide problem with a straightforward answer. David Halliday asked a question of his own which I will present after setting up the context. click or skip this reading of the blog
There are linear field equations of gravity called gravitomagnetism. It starts from the best starting place we have, general relativity. At the end of my talk last year at the 13th Eastern Gravity Meeting in Raleigh, someone asked me to compare gravitomagentism with my hypercomplex number gravity field equations. I knew they were different, but had not dived into that subject in detail. My talk this year at the 14th Eastern Gravity Meeting was a shop and compare between the two proposals. The blog will serve up the meat and potatoes of that talk at Princeton, Friday June 3, 2011, at 4:40pm.
The video “Why Quantum Mechanics is Weird” (25k views) won the 2005 Berkeley Video&Film Festival Best of Festival Award in Education. That is second place, behind a Grand Festival Award which went to a film on polar bears (much cuter than me talking for 27 minutes). In this blog, I will go through the math behind the video which provides a novel, entirely mathematical explanation for why causality is different between classical and quantum mechanics. Calculus done correctly in spacetime may turn out to provide the correct answer, completely philosophy-free, as it must be.
The complex plane should be known as the Wessel plane, after the Norwegian-Danish land surveyor. His paper of 1799 was ignored because few were reading the preprint server at that time. Mr. Bookshop in the big city of Paris gets his name associated with graphing complex numbers in a plane. This is one reason I avoid naming things for people as proper credit is complicated.
Bell's Future Quantum Mechanics - A Novel Interpretation
Future Train Wreck: Mine or Modern Physics talk Next Thursday, Jan. 26
Holiday Physics Card, 2016
Unified Mathematical Field Theory Talk
